BoxRec

Foreman a 'one-dimensional slugger'? He was far more than that. It's not all about inches and pounds either, particularly when they are as negligible as the differences between Foreman and Lewis. Lewis had a longer reach than Mercer and Klitschko, both of whom repeatedly got to his chin. Foreman has a longer reach than either of those guys. So what now?

Stylistically, Jimmy Young has nothing in common with Lewis. There's no reason to bring him into the debate. He boxes in a totally different style, is far more slippery, and crucially had an A grade chin - and yet was knocked silly, out on his feet, by Foreman's power punching in the 7th round.

"Foreman is so overrated it's hilarious" is an utterly ridiculous comment. Foreman is somewhere near the top of the pile in the Golden Age of Heavyweight Boxing. What's hilarious is a man totally besotted by Wladimir Klitschko - who has never beaten a single great fighter and been knocked out three times by average fighters and has been down 12, 13 times in his career - finding George Foreman's high regard mystifying.

Of course it would mystify you.

loaded_gloves wrote:Foreman a 'one-dimensional slugger'? He was far more than that. It's not all about inches and pounds either, particularly when they are as negligible as the differences between Foreman and Lewis. Lewis had a longer reach than Mercer and Klitschko, both of whom repeatedly got to his chin. Foreman has a longer reach than either of those guys. So what now?

Stylistically, Jimmy Young has nothing in common with Lewis. There's no reason to bring him into the debate. He boxes in a totally different style, is far more slippery, and crucially had an A grade chin - and yet was knocked silly, out on his feet, by Foreman's power punching in the 7th round.

"Foreman is so overrated it's hilarious" is an utterly ridiculous comment. Foreman is somewhere near the top of the pile in the Golden Age of Heavyweight Boxing. What's hilarious is a man totally besotted by Wladimir Klitschko - who has never beaten a single great fighter and been knocked out three times by average fighters and has been down 12, 13 times in his career - finding George Foreman's high regard mystifying.

Of course it would mystify you.

#1. So could he out box a guy? Have you ever watched Foreman fight? Guy is so overrated. As soon as he got in there with a boxer he crumbled.

#2. Ok so a 31 or so old Klitschko got to the chin of an out oh shape 37 or so old Lennox Lewis. Congratulations! Who won those fights again?

#3. Foreman never used his reach to his advantage like Lennox did

#4. Lennox was 10X the fighter Young was. Who became Undisputed and reigned longer? Lennox. You don't see anyone having Jimmy Young in their top 10 heavyweights in history

#5. Foreman had his losses too. He lost to an old Ali who most people thought Ali was going to lose. Foreman ended up getting knocked out. Foreman then went on to get out boxed by the 20-5-2 ATG Jimmy Young. Lets also compare some statistics


Title Reign:

George Foreman 2 Defenses
Wladimir Klitschko 14 Defenses

CrazyHorse wrote:Foreman is so overrated it's hilarious.

used to think the same. not so sure anymore.

george had too much success too quickly, but
i do not think any ATG took out two other ATGs
in frazier and norton the way foreman did. he
was for real, but his early success and big ego
kept him from learning what he IMHO lacked:
footwork and ring smarts.

CrazyHorse wrote:Foreman ... lost to an old Ali

i do see Ali in that fight post prime, which is not
surprising for a fighter whose main asset was ...
speed. but he was nevertheless a fantastic heavy
weight when he fought George. i would not call
this version of Ali old.

why can't people be fans of someone and still see
others with more objectivity ...

Yes the Ali that beat George was post prime, but he still had a lot left, as he showed in Kinshasa.

CrazyHorse wrote: George Foreman 2 Defenses
Wladimir Klitschko 14 Defenses

George has Smokin' Joe Frazier and Ken Norton. And he lost it to Muhammad Ali. Enough said.

Remind me of those transcendental, all-time greats in Wladimir's 14 golden defences?

loaded_gloves wrote:

CrazyHorse wrote: George Foreman 2 Defenses
Wladimir Klitschko 14 Defenses

George has Smokin' Joe Frazier and Ken Norton. And he lost it to Muhammad Ali. Enough said.

Remind me of those transcendental, all-time greats in Wladimir's 14 golden defences?

The legendary Jimmy Young put George into retirement for over almost 10 years who was 20-5-1

Foreman was so good he could retire for 10 years, balloon up to over 300 pounds and still come back and regain the real title when he was 45, after originally holding the title in the golden age. If you don't think he's a great fighter you are a moron, period.

Flump wrote:Foreman was so good he could retire for 10 years, balloon up to over 300 pounds and still come back and regain the real title when he was 45, after originally holding the title in the golden age. If you don't think he's a great fighter you are a moron, period.

Where did I say was not a great fighter? Overrated? Yes ... Great? Yeah. He was pretty good

man wrote:i do see Ali in that fight post prime, which is not
surprising for a fighter whose main asset was ...
speed. but he was nevertheless a fantastic heavy
weight when he fought George. i would not call
this version of Ali old.

why can't people be fans of someone and still see
others with more objectivity ...

I didn't say Ali was a crap heavyweight at that point. Just was a past prime ali who said the only reason he rope a doped was because he knew he couldn't dance for 15 rounds and wanted to tire out george. I'm a fan of Ali

Flump wrote:Foreman was so good he could retire for 10 years, balloon up to over 300 pounds and still come back and regain the real title when he was 45, after originally holding the title in the golden age. If you don't think he's a great fighter you are a moron, period.

He is a moron, period. He has no arguments, skims Boxrec to judge fighters he doesn't know anything about, and hides behind empty stats and numbers.

He's trying to infer Jimmy Young is a bum, a man who, irrespective of judges decisions, beat George Foreman, Muhammad Ali, Earnie Shavers, Ron Lyle, and Ken Norton, among others.

He's a moron. Period.

loaded_gloves wrote:

Flump wrote:Foreman was so good he could retire for 10 years, balloon up to over 300 pounds and still come back and regain the real title when he was 45, after originally holding the title in the golden age. If you don't think he's a great fighter you are a moron, period.

He is a moron, period. He has no arguments, skims Boxrec to judge fighters he doesn't know anything about, and hides behind empty stats and numbers.

He's trying to infer Jimmy Young is a bum, a man who, irrespective of judges decisions, beat George Foreman, Muhammad Ali, Earnie Shavers, Ron Lyle, and Ken Norton, among others.

He's a moron. Period.

Foreman has his flaws, and he did lose to Jimmy Young. However, he had a great career and was one of best heavyweights ever. Why the need some have to bash him is silly.

The smart thinking is that over 12 rounds, the older version of Foreman is more effective than the somewhat stiff and robotic version of the 1970's. He was smart enough to know his limitations, and avoided Bowe and Lewis sensibly.

Foreman was quite upfront in his comeback career that he wanted nothing to do with Lewis. He was very carefully matched second time around.

It made sense for him to be carefully matched. He was off for 10 years, so at first he needed several easy fights to get rid of some ring rust.
I don't see how you can blame him for not fighting Lewis and Bowe when he was in his 40s. He certainly would have been willing to fought them when he was in his 20s.

He did some guts in his comeback. He gave a prime Evander Holyfield a lot more trouble than he had any right to.
You also have to remember that when Foreman first started his comeback, Mike Tyson was champion. Foreman's plan was to eventually challenge Tyson for the title.

Another thing that Foreman gets ripped for was having trouble with Peralta early in his career. People don't seem to realize that Foreman was a pro for less than a year going into that fight. Yet Foreman and his management team get ripped for being overly protective. Yet, they were willing to take on Peralta again a year later.

He gets ripped for the Lyle fight. Yes he almost got ko'd. However, he also showed a lot of heart. He certainly could have found an easier opponent after a bit of a layoff. The bottom line is that he won in 5 rounds.

Peralta was no slouch, and should put to rest that Foreman "never" had his way with a slick boxer.

Just wasn't his forte.

Ambling Alp II wrote:It made sense for him to be carefully matched. He was off for 10 years, so at first he needed several easy fights to get rid of some ring rust.

Yeah for sure but you have to agree he got an easy route to his title shot, the best names being a bloated Bert Cooper, a bloated Qawi, Adilson Rodrigues and Cooney bought out of retirement to fight him. He fancied his chances against Holyfield and Tyson but Lewis was a different proposition.

Controversial wrote: Yeah for sure but you have to agree he got an easy route to his title shot, the best names being a bloated Bert Cooper, a bloated Qawi, Adilson Rodrigues and Cooney bought out of retirement to fight him. He fancied his chances against Holyfield and Tyson but Lewis was a different proposition.

Bert Cooper bloated for Foreman? Have you seen the fight? He was in fine shape. Foreman walked through him in a way that top 10 ranked Mercer and Norris couldn't do, or even Holyfield.

I have no issue at all with Holyfield taking on Foreman in his first title defence, Foreman had been active, whacked the ranked Rodriguez and was wildly popular. Who else at that time was available? Moorer making his heavyweight debut? Morrison taking his first step up on the undercard? Tyson and Ruddock engaged with each other? Who should he have fought?

Foreman absolutely validated his shot with a sterling, spirited challenge.

I think it's fair to say, even Cooper in his own words admitted he quit against Foreman.

loaded_gloves wrote:

Controversial wrote: Yeah for sure but you have to agree he got an easy route to his title shot, the best names being a bloated Bert Cooper, a bloated Qawi, Adilson Rodrigues and Cooney bought out of retirement to fight him. He fancied his chances against Holyfield and Tyson but Lewis was a different proposition.

Bert Cooper bloated for Foreman? Have you seen the fight? He was in fine shape. Foreman walked through him in a way that top 10 ranked Mercer and Norris couldn't do, or even Holyfield.

I have no issue at all with Holyfield taking on Foreman in his first title defence, Foreman had been active, whacked the ranked Rodriguez and was wildly popular. Who else at that time was available? Moorer making his heavyweight debut? Morrison taking his first step up on the undercard? Tyson and Ruddock engaged with each other? Who should he have fought?

Foreman absolutely validated his shot with a sterling, spirited challenge.

Ok bloated a bad choice of word. What I meant with Cooper was he was a dangerous puncher but struggled with top tier fighters if he couldn't land a big punch. Cooper just quit in his corner as soon as the going got tough against Foreman. Cooper is one of my favourite journeymen but was often stopped and often beaten. It's fair to say no opponent Foreman fought before the Holyfield fight was ever given any serious chance of beating him. Foreman also one of my favourite fighters and it doesn't get away from the fact that he wanted no part of Lewis.

Controversial wrote:

loaded_gloves wrote:

Controversial wrote: Yeah for sure but you have to agree he got an easy route to his title shot, the best names being a bloated Bert Cooper, a bloated Qawi, Adilson Rodrigues and Cooney bought out of retirement to fight him. He fancied his chances against Holyfield and Tyson but Lewis was a different proposition.

Bert Cooper bloated for Foreman? Have you seen the fight? He was in fine shape. Foreman walked through him in a way that top 10 ranked Mercer and Norris couldn't do, or even Holyfield.

I have no issue at all with Holyfield taking on Foreman in his first title defence, Foreman had been active, whacked the ranked Rodriguez and was wildly popular. Who else at that time was available? Moorer making his heavyweight debut? Morrison taking his first step up on the undercard? Tyson and Ruddock engaged with each other? Who should he have fought?

Foreman absolutely validated his shot with a sterling, spirited challenge.

Ok bloated a bad choice of word. What I meant with Cooper was he was a dangerous puncher but struggled with top tier fighters if he couldn't land a big punch. Cooper just quit in his corner as soon as the going got tough against Foreman. Cooper is one of my favourite journeymen but was often stopped and often beaten. It's fair to say no opponent Foreman fought before the Holyfield fight was ever given any serious chance of beating him. Foreman also one of my favourite fighters and it doesn't get away from the fact that he wanted no part of Lewis.

Actually, it was more like Cooper quit before the going got tough.

George wanted no part of Lewis, Bowe, Ruddock, Witherspoon, Smith, Williams, Bruno, Tubbs, or anybody else with skills that would probably beat him. He was targeting a big money title shot and was a master at buidling himself up without having to take any risks. What he accomplished was great, but it's impossible to recognize how carefully managed his career was.

I sort of agree with that. He did not want to take any unecessary risks. However, he would take on just about anyone if that meant a title shot. Again, Mike Tyson was the undisputed heavyweight champ when he began his comeback. For all it looked like at the time, in 1987, he would have to beat Tyson.

Holyfield was better than the guys mentioned (with only Lewis and Bowe being close) and he fought him.
I would rate Morrer as comparable to Smith, Williams, Ruddock, Tubbs etc. I am sure he would have fought any of them if it meant him getting a title shot.
Agree that he could have had better title defenses.

The thing is with that list, how many people fought any of them?

Holyfield fought fading forces prior to Douglas, Foreman same, Bowe fought only one man in that list and lost comprehensively prior to his title shot, Lewis fought only Ruddock in that list and that because it was a final eliminator- NONE of those guys in that era were taking risks without a title on the line. Who was Moorer's major scalp prior to his title fight? Who did Tyson beat post-prison prior to his shot? Foreman was hardly an anomaly in that respect.

Spoon couldn't get a big fight with anyone until he was pushing 40 - and then he so thoroughly annihilated JLG both Lewis and Bowe backed off from fighting him!

Part of the problem with so many titles is that there is no reason for a top contender to fight another top contender. Just bide your time and eventually you will get a shot at one of the titles.

With some exceptions, most of the big heavyweight fights that could have occurred in the 1990s did not materialize. It was a shame because a deep era.